Welcome to The Rant! Your very own electronic cesspool of naughty, left wing propaganda. MADE IN AMERICA!!!

Monday, May 10, 2010

Oil Spills and B Movies

Roll the opening credits:

METRO GOLDWYN MAYERPRESENTS

"Andy Hardy Gets A Clue"

StarringMickey Rooney as Andy HardyandLewis Stone as Judge Hardy

A fun time for the entire family!

The Camera fades from black onto a house in a pleasant neighborhood in the mythical Midwestern town of Carvel. The home is the residence of kindly Judge Hardy and his family. The scene dissolves into the interior of the Judge's study. He is sitting in his leather-bound chair in front of the fireplace, concentrating on a small stack of legal briefs which are placed on his lap. There is a quiet knock on the door. "Come in", he says. From camera left enters the Judge's fifteen-year-old son, Andy Hardy:

Andy Hardy: Dad? I was wondering if we could have a little talk, you know, man-to-man.

Judge Hardy: What is it, Andrew?

Andy Hardy: I've been thinking a lot lately about deregulation.

Judge Hardy: In what way, son?

Andy Hardy: Well, Dad, I'm starting to think that deregulation might not have been a really neat idea after all.

Judge Hardy: No shit, Sherlock.

Indeed. But for the absence of something which has been called an "acoustics detector" or an "acoustics regulator" or a "Remote Activated Blowout Detector" (depending on which news report you read) the catastrophe which is now playing itself out in the Gulf of Mexico might very well have been avoided. Once upon a time, a long, long time ago, the device was mandatory on all oil rigs. When the Bush/Cheney regime seized power via an electoral coup in 2000 (aided and abetted by the Supreme Court), the acoustics/blowout thingamajig was deemed too expensive.

The price? Five hundred thousand dollars.

As Ben Franklin's old adage says, "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." It's such a basic lesson of life. Most of us learn it sooner or later....Most of us. You don't need a better example of the greed and stupidity of these people than the one I am offering you here: They placed the lives and livelihoods of millions of people living on the Gulf coast in total and undeniable jeopardy - all to save a measly half a million bucks. This is the worst case criminal negligence I have ever heard about in my entire life. You would expect someone to go to prison for this, wouldn't you? Yeah, I would, too. Don't hold your breath.

Here's the really funny part: The latest right wing talking point is that this is Obama's Katrina! How's that for a rib-tickler? Don't let them fool you. There are a lot of politicians with their fingerprints on this debacle. Barack Obama is not one of them. This tragedy is owned by failed oilmen George Walker Bush and Richard Bruce Cheney. The two of them are culpable - particularly former President Cheney. No, that was not a typo. President Obama's only responsibility is in the cleaning up of their mess - a task in itself. A half a century from now, they'll still be cleaning up the mess of the Bush/Cheney era. Count on it.

Judge Hardy's restraint in dealing with his semi-clueless kid was truly impressive. If I had been in the old guy's shoes, I'd have slapped Andy Hardy upside his head. Of course deregulation wasn't a "really neat" idea. In fact, three decades of historical hindsight proves conclusively that it was one of the worst domestic policies in the history of this country. In effect we have allowed the foxes to maintain the chicken house. Why should we be the least bit surprised to come home from our drunken, thirty-year binge to find a coop full of dead chickens?

There used to be a woman who attended my local church whose name was Mrs. Murray. She was the sweetest, kindest old lady you'd ever want to meet. My dad , who knew her from boyhood, once remarked that she was as close to a saint as anyone he ever knew. If all human beings were like Mrs. Murray, rules and regulations - LAW - would not be necessary. They could always be counted on to do the right thing. But it is unreasonable to expect businessmen and women to police themselves - in fact it's beyond imbecilic. They will always cut every corner possible in order to make as much profit as they can. That's human nature! That's why regulation of the financial marketplace and industry is essential! Look what happened after thirty years of Wall Street deregulation. They drove our economy into the ditch. Now look what is happening in the Gulf? Two plus two equals....This ain't rocket science, folks.

Here's the problem: For the last thirty years we Americans have had the unfortunate tendency of placing our government into the hands of people whose core philosophy is that government is a bad thing. All-in-all, that's not a particularly smart idea. In fact it is a mind-numbingly insane idea. The germ of the disease that is now threatening the life of the Gulf of Mexico can be fairly traced back to the fact that the politicians we stupidly thought would govern failed to do so. How can it be that so many Americans are eager to place these people back in power come Election day next? It's that mass amnesia for which we're justifiably famous, I suppose.

As the decade of the teens unfolds, the price we will be forced to pay as a result of decades of neglect of America's infrastructure will be astronomical. This disaster could have been avoided by means of a simple ounce of prevention. Franklin's adage of which I spoke was written over two centuries ago. Given the adjustments for inflation, it's going to cost a whole lot more than a pound to cure this. Let's stop kidding ourselves. This is going to involve decades of serious taxation. What other options do we have? Oh, right. Tax cuts for the rich. Have another sip.

Tom DeganGoshen NYtomdegan@frontiernet.net

BREAKING NEWS:

A few minutes ago, President Obama nominated Elena Kagan to succeed retiring Justice John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court. This is a big disappointment. Although she has more-than-a-few positives that qualify her for that position, she is hardly the Liberal firebrand I was hoping for to counterbalance the the five extremist twits on that court who are trying to destroy American democracy. Then again, Earl Warren (an Eisenhower appointee) surprised us in 1954 when he wrote the Brown vs. Board of Education Decision. Maybe Ms. Kagan will surprise us as well.

The good news is that she does not have much of a paper trail so there will be nothing for the Conservatives to complain about....What am I saying? Of course they'll find something to complain about. They always find something to complain about. They complain a lot. Did you ever notice that?

11:31 AM:

I know why there's no sun up in the sky. It was just announced that Lena Horne has died at age 92. What a woman! What a life! And to think she once starred in a movie with Fats Waller. He has been gone for nearly seventy years! Thank God she was allowed the gift of time that would be denied to the Fat Man. We're lucky we had her for as long as we did. America is a better place because of Lena Horne. Stormy weather indeed.

The aniti-Obamas will find any and every possible way to spin everything that has and will happen under this administration. Its all a big joke... As much heat as Bush took, it will never equate a fraction of the nastiness and vile of the racist and disgusting t-baggers. You can edit that, but we all know its true...

For the last year and a half they have been shouting that its time to stop blaming Bush... F-you hypocrites....

Now they claim no affiliation or "independent" F-you again! We all know the majority of the t-baggers worshiped Bush. They probably still have photos of him hanging on their refrigerators.

I apologize for the complete rudeness, I simply cant be as civil about all of this as you...

I'm glad you found the information I was seeking on the Cheney tie-in to the Gulf tragedy. When the stupids elected G. W. Bush and R. B. Chaney they put two oil men in power and in a position to wreak their havoc. In addition to all the other damage they did to the U.S. we can add the oil spill mess to their greed and incompetence. Thanks GOP for nothing.

I am so sad that Lena Horne died. Of course it was her time (maybe beyond at her age) but she will be missed. She was one of the great vocalists of my generation and beyond. She was also very beautiful and had to fight racism every step of the way to succeed.

I have to admit that I laughed out loud when I read that one, Harley. You got me dead center!

And yes, Darlene, I, too was sad to hear of Lena's passing. What a career! What a woman! She made a film with Fats Waller. He's been dead for almost seventy years! A good and long career. God rest her soul.

Granted, it’s not the same platform, but here’s an interesting and apropos article published a year ago by Food and Water Watch organization regarding the deepwater Atlantis platform (also BP). I know nothing about them as an organization, but it looks like somebody was digging under the right rocks. They make a good argument and the information seems technically credible – a far cry from a lot of what comes out of “watch” organizations. Wonder if Salazar ever actually saw the letter? This has to be the “I told you so” of the year…

It’s always funny to hear leftists criticize those jurists who actually apply the law as it is written. Somehow they can find every restriction in the book for purposefully and explicitly broad enumerated rights yet find unrestricted federal rights for things with zero supporting language, like abortion. To them, the words to the Constitution are only as meaningful as their preference for the resulting policies. There is no law worded too tightly for them to exploit – words are just speed bumps to their utopian dream.

Tom, here’s my suggestion: if you have a mortgage (or perhaps a car payment), tell your lender that your contract is a “living, breathing document” and in the context of modern times and the poor economy, you really don’t owe all of the money it says. Tell them you’re not going to go through the mutually-agreed process of amending the terms – you’re just going to start paying less. After all, times have changed, and they need to get with the program. I think you’d have a great case in court!

Rich...What the heck? The Supremes are something like 7 out of 9 Republicrats and they just declared that legal entities created from groups of people agreeing to do something for profit are the same as those people doing the agreeing! Corporations not only equal people but have more rights. Dude, that's extreme in the extreme, you just don't see it in terms of people and words, you see it in terms of political parties... and son, there ain't but ONE PARTY in America and it's the one the rich are throwing for themselves. They have you thinking there are lefts and rights and Democrats when it's just people thinking and talking about shit. I'm not Left or Right, I'm ME in the center of ME. I don't like being forced to finance killing of people, what does that make me, Rich, a bad guy? I don't think my money should be sent to CEOs of huge corporations because they were incompetent but huge. I think of myself as a conservative where money is concerned and i don't like killing people, especially women and children far away from ME. Tell me, Rich, if you were shot and bleeding would you accept help from a Leftist? If you needed blood transfused would you accept a Radical's blood? because it's all the same, dude, all red and best kept inside.

Where have you been? Did you just see Senator Bennett get shown the door in Utah for his vote on TARP? True conservatives will not accept bailouts - period. And perhaps you should read up on which party was responsible for the repeal of Glass-Steagall and the de-regulation of Fannie and Freddie before we start talking about "too big to fail". There's a reason Obama got a million dollars from Goldman last election cycle.

Whether or not you and I agree a particular war is just, you will hopefully understand that it is sometimes necessary to protect your individual liberties and the Constitution, right? This is why war powers are mentioned in the Constitution, yet I can't seem to find the provisions for health care or abortion.

"Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech" Where is the ambiguity there, W.D.? Does it say what types or sizes of organizations can help politicians get their message out? You want to draw an arbitrary line on free speech when there is intentionally no line drawn. Where is it written you must work for a company(or a union) that gives money to a politician whose message you reject?

You're right - you don't sound like a Democrat but like someone who actually cares about figuring things out. Here's my advice: Study the Constitution. Live it. Love it. Vote it. It's the only thing standing between power-hungry politicans and your liberty.

OK the spin is on for Kagan-love your commenter noting that 7 of 9 SC Justices are conservative. That's the kind of fucking idiocy I have to deal with when debating with the left.

With Kagan, we are about to see the continued politicization and infiltration of the SC by fifth column domestic enemies. Simply put, Kagan is a less intelligent Obama; and further neither is qualified to serve in any government position much less the ones they hold.

Like so many scumbags with their foot on this country's throat, they are just some one with a law degree and not much else.

She has never served on the bench kinda like Obama never had any experience running a GD thing-how's that no experience thingie working out for everyone huh? And this woman is about to become one of the most dangerous people in the country.

I mean, sheesh, Sotomayar besides being a racist, is kinda incoherent but lets eavesdrop on Kagan's scintillating legal acumen, razor sharp intellect and an unbelievable grasp of the Constitution. Here is Solicitor General Kagan in her opening remarks before the SC in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

"Mr Chief Justice and may it please the Court: I have 3 quick points to make about the government position. The first is that this issue has a long history. For over 100 years Congress has made a judgment that corporations must be subject to special rules when they participate in elections and this Court has never questioned that judgment"

Justice Scalia then responded, "Wait wait wait wait, we never questioned it but we never approved it either."

Kagan again(totally ignoring Justice Scalia's remarks) "I will repeat what I said Justice Scalia, for over 100 years, this Court, faced with many opportunities to do so, left standing this legislation that is at issue in this case"

Justice Scalia then said,"I don't understand what you're saying. I mean we are not a self starting institution here. We can only disapprove of something, we can only rule on something when somebody asks us to. And if there never was an occasion for us to approve or disapprove, it proves nothing whatever that we didn't disapprove it."

So IOW, our next SC Justice believes that the Court should be out there THEMSELVES, searching for things to rule on. Wonderfuckingful. We can be assured this woman is going to make known just exactly what kind of things she wants to LEGISLATE FROM THE BENCH.

I'm getting such a kick out of the left dominated media saying this woman might even be a "Bushie" OMG, HAHAHAHA-Kagan makes Ginsberg look positively centrist.

Heaven help us if one of the sensible SC Justices have to retire and Obama gets to replace a conservative. We might as well send our representatives home because Kagan and her crew will be making laws right there in the Court.never never land

The poster above is absolutely correct. You don’t have to be an attorney to figure out the concept of legal standing. It’s not the high court’s job to just read the news and strike down laws willy-nilly without a case before it. This is also why the AZ law hasn’t been reviewed by the Supremes yet – no one has been affected by it so no one has standing. It’s just incredible that this person could not even understand this basic concept. What does she think - every 5-4 decision should be reviewed upon confirmation of a new justice, and any laws not touched by the court are an implicit validation of their Constitutionality? These are the kinds of lawyers Harvard is producing?

This woman will be voted in unanimously by Senate Democrats because they know she will serve her ideology first. They couldn’t give a damn about fidelity to the law. Why go through the formal process of amending the Constitution when you can just give lifetime appointments to justices who will always rule in your favor?

Why does society place such high regard on Harvard and the Ivy league schools ?? All they do is produce pro-establishment robots who believe their purpose in life is to preserve the status quo while they try to obtain obscene wealth. I'd rather see a radical lawyer like Ron Kuby on the Supreme Court, someone we can trust !!

So why did Obama go from community organizer to establishment hack ?? Now he's on the other side of the fence. Who was he organizing the community against ?? Seems to me it was the same establishment he now supports !! So he's really just a traitor !!

Never heard of her. Never heard of Kagan. Never heard of Sotomayor (sp?). I won't have heard of the next one they trot out. These people are meaningless to me. Doesn't matter. They don't honor the laws and they don't honor the Constitution. Roe v. Wade is a clear example of that. It subverts our laws against murder and violates the constitutional rights of the unborn Americans.

You make a good point regarding the fact that more than a few Conservatives rejected Meyers as being grossly under qualified. But you have to admit that Elana Kagan has a bit more (a lot more, in fact) legal chops than Harriet Meyers.

I have to admit what? She argued one case before the Supreme Court and lost 8-0. She evidently thinks it's the court's job to haphazardly pick laws for Constitutional ruling. It's almost as if she has no idea how our legal system works.

I find it truly amazing watching from this distance that people still bitch about Roe v Wade. It seems to me that the people doing the bitching have a distorted view of freedom. The US is supposed to be a free nation but according to them the freedoms only exist if you agree with them. Freedom to me is the ability to recognize a different philosphy and to co-exist with that philosphy and I think they should try that simplistic view it might destress their life.

So, you’re saying that I have the distorted view of freedom and that I should simply accept your view. Does that sentiment apply to you as well? Maybe we could overturn Roe v. Wade and you could recognize my philosophy and co-exist with it. I like that better.

Or, what if I decide that I think it’d be fun to punch old ladies and take their purses. I wouldn’t get far in this nation with that philosophy – few would be willing to co-exist with me. So, then, would the US still be a free nation for me?

Den, you really don't understand the first thing about freedom and the civil society. What you advocate is a form of totalitarianism, where unelected, lifetime officials create laws by judicial fiat.

You like the idea of available abortion, so it doesn't matter much to you what kind backwards logic they piece together to justify it. But, if people like Kagan continue to be appointed, there will eventually be a day when Supremes start making lawless decisions which adversely affect you. You'll be left asking, "where's the constitutional basis for that?". Maybe then you'll get a lecture about "freedom", but what they're really talking about is the freedom of someone else at the expense of yours. Then, your only recourse will be to hope you can outlive them, provided their replacements are actually committed to upholding the law.

It would serve us well to remember that the removal of Glass/Stegal happened under Clinton and Rubin. Proving that the strange hypnosis that the myth of Ronald Reagan and Ayn Rand is not a disease strictly born of Republicans.

The oil spill IS indeed squarely on the hands of President Cheney and his pet Georgie. I bring up the other issue to just keep in mind that we have to watch our leaders at all times, no matter what party.

My logic, backward or forward has absolutely nothing to do with my views on abortion. I have just reread my post and can't see a single word either in favour or against it in any way shape or form. Just so you can justify your stereotypical view I will say that yes I agree that a woman has the right to choose. As there is no way that you will ever consider anyone has a different view to yours as being valid you probably wont understand that I consider myself to both free and rather civilised with a reasonable understanding of both.I live in a society whose senior jurists are not beholden to one end of the political spectrum or the other and I can't remember one of them here being precluded from the position because of a witch hunt on their lives.I also live in a society that has a murder rate countrywide a fraction of that of any major US city. So I am guessing that with your stated views thus far you would also the rate that citizens who are killed by other citizens of your country would place your country on the same level of civility as either Iraq or Afghanistan and if that is the case I'm grateful to be uncivilised.There are many good things about the US but at the same time many things that could be changed for the better and until such time that individuals understand those differences, ignorance and xenopobia will be the bedrocks that many of the hard right of the political spectrum will continue to use as the cudgel to try and impose that will on the rest of the world.I don't hate the US as a matter of fact I find many aspects rather intriguing but I do find it difficult to sit back and cop flack from narrow minded arrogant and self rightous individuals who refuse to think for themselves.

Den, as is typical with those who are not on the side of truth and really have no valid argument, you degenerate into name-calling. When you are backed into a corner, the only device you have left is to try to devalue my valid argument by brushing it aside as xenophobic and ignorant. What is xenophobic and ignorant is to accuse someone of such simply because their view is different from yours. You implied that those like me “cudgel” others with our views. Last time I checked, Roe v. Wade is still in effect, so I guess our “cudgeling” hasn’t been so effective. Your statement is, itself, the kind of argument that seeks to cudgel the other. That is, without any valid refutation, you would like to dismiss my argument and shut down the debate. I won’t allow that. I asserted that Roe v. Wade is illegal and unconstitutional. If you have a valid counter to that, I’d be interested to hear it. It will, though, need to be a little more reasonable that comparing the US to Iraq or Afghanistan. That’s just silly.

So, some foreigner with not one iota of how a constitutional republic works calls us arrogant demanding a functioning government - all while lecturing us on how we should govern ourselves. King George had some ideas of how America should be governed too.

I’m going to go out on a limb and guess you’re from England – a country about the average size of one of our 50 states. So, forgive me if I dismiss your crime comparison as categorically asinine, while I direct you to the crime rate in Chicago - the leftist utopia from which our esteemed president hails. A place where cops wear so much body armor (sorry – armour), you might think they were on the front lines in Afghanistan.

Yes, perhaps we should be more “civilised” like Europe, where not only do we have to bail out our own domestic socialist programs, we’re now bailing out your neighbors in the EU, which have become nothing more than insolvent banana republics. Yes, not only do these civilized societies have the luxury of living under the United States’ nuclear umbrella which enables them to fund their soviet-style entitlement systems by replacing their militaries with marching bands, they still can’t even pay for them.

I'll be happy to have Republicans accept blame for the oil spill, despite the large sums of money Obama received from BP and the fact we can only drill at depths where only robots can get to the well. I guess it’s just too bad all of those gulf fisherman will have to keep those solar-powered fishing boats tied up at the dock until this mess is cleaned up.

We had deregulation in our building industry for the same reasons that you had deregulation in the USA and what we have now is a phenomenon known as leaky home syndrome - the walls leak. Some of the homes are of the best and most expensive design. What caused the problem was lack of skills, disregard for proper construction, cost cutting, corner-cutting, and lack of accountability. For years local bodies had administered the building regulations, but under deregulation, the builders themselves were entrusted with keeping the building regulations. It just didn't happen. Now the government is offering remedial packages to homeowners that are nothing short of niggardly: half the costs of repair will be met by the govt and local bodies and the rest by the homeowners themselves. Low interest loans will be made available to the home owners. So these poor souls, already paying mortgages on their leaky homes, will end up paying to remedy a problem which is not of their making. The costs should be borne by the people who caused the problems in the first place: the government which followed its ideology to such absurd lengths. I despair!

Rich why in hell would you think I'm from England. Which as far as I can see is another country that is sinking under a mountain of debt. As for King George and his family I consider them to be the greatest parasites known to mankind. The country I live in is about the same size as the US but without the same desire to be the worlds bankers and policeman. You dismiss the crime arguement as asinine yet you validate my point with your use of Chicago as a role model. You cant have it both ways.You also argue that the US is bailing out my neighbours well Im sure they will be happy to hear that it will only increase the standard of living across the populations of all of their countries but honestly we don't need your money, I think it might be better spent trying to get your own country back to some semblence of of civility.

Connotatively, I think that there is a difference between bitching and critiquing. Tom, I think of you as a critic, an observer of the failings and fraility of the human condition. Bitching is complaining about trivialities as if they had significance. You never complain about anything trivial; instead you focus on issues of substance such as this post about the detrimental effects of the love affair of elected officals with deregulation for the past 30 years.

Thank you for the kind words, Sheria, and your generous assessment of my motives. It is true that I do try to overlook the trivial and focus primarily on what effects all of us - not only as citizens of America - but as citizens of the world as well. A number of years ago I was reading a series of essays by the British journalist Alistair Cooke. One in particular caught my interest it involved a....Oh, Damn! I SPILLED TOMATO JUICE ON MY NEW BLUE JEANS! DAMN! DAMN! DAMN! DAMN! DAMN!